9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eam coal attracting nil rate of duty. It was also followed by the Mumbai Bench. On the other hand, the Bangalore Bench of CESTAT held that the coal imported would be bituminous coal attracting duty @ 5%. Thus, in view of the conflicting decisions, the matter was referred to the Larger Bench and vide order dated 16.1.2017, the issue was taken up for consideration by the Larger Bench - Taking note of the fact that the decision rendered by the Bangalore Bench in the case of M/s. Maruti Ispat and Energy Pvt. Ltd. [2014 (10) TMI 944 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] was appealed before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Larger Bench directed that the matter being subjudice before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the assessees were granted opportunity to come again befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ates Shri M.N, Bharathi, S. Bharkavi and V.S. Manoj Appearance for the Respondent - Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The above miscellaneous applications filed by the department came up for hearing as per the published list. After hearing both sides, in view of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal on the issue under consideration in all these appeals, it was deemed fit to take up the appeals itself for disposal along with these miscellaneous applications. 2. On behalf of the Department, Id. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, submitted that these miscellaneous application have been filed by the department to modify the waiver of predeposit given by the Tribunal vide various miscellaneous orders i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ESTAT, Hyderabad vide Final Order No. A/31081 to 31177/2017 dated 14.7.2017 has remanded the said appeals to the adjudicating authorities for denovo adjudication awaiting the outcome of the decision in the appeal pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Similar view was taken by the CESTAT, Ahmedabad vide Final Order No. A/ 11019 to 11105/2017 dated 19.5.2017 thereby disposing a batch of more than 180 appeals. That in the present appeals the decision of the Larger Bench would apply and therefore the miscellaneous applications filed by the department are unsustainable. It is also pointed out by Id. counsels that the order passed by the Tribunal waiving the predeposit was challenged by the department before the Hon'ble High Court of Mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng decisions, the matter was referred to the Larger Bench and vide order dated 16.1.2017, the issue was taken up for consideration by the Larger Bench. On such date, taking note of the fact that the decision rendered by the Bangalore Bench in the case of M/s. Maruti Ispat and Energy Pvt. Ltd. was appealed before the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide Civil Appeal Nos. 28937/2014 and 9725/2014, the Larger Bench directed that the matter being subjudice before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the assessees were granted opportunity to come again before the Tribunal after the verdict from the Hon'ble Apex Court. The reference applications were disposed in the above manner. The relevant portion of the Larger Bench decision is reproduced under:- 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
